Yup. Especially since the RNC can choose their own moderators and stream debates directly to viewers/listeners, bypassing the MSM news completely.

whatcat on August 7, 2013 at 12:09 PM

The problem is that there will always be a raft of desperate RINO candidates that will jump at the chance to join an MSNBC debate, -the Johnny Johnsons and the Howard Hunstsmans. The RNC doesn’t have the balls to punish them for that, and the mainstream candidates feel obliged to follow them.

Has there ever been a biopic produced about someone who has actually accomplished so little?

Monkeytoe on August 7, 2013 at 11:10 AM

Do you mean, besides her former boss?

]]>By: novaculushttp://hotair.com/archives/2013/08/07/mika-brzezinski-david-brock-agree-that-priebus-has-a-point-about-hillary-films/comment-page-1/#comment-7228057
Wed, 07 Aug 2013 16:15:40 +0000http://hotair.com/?p=273680#comment-7228057I still think it’s not the smartest move by Priebus. He could have raised concerns, and warned that Republicans would be watching. If the movies glossed over the scandals, the failures, and the overall lack of accomplishments (and they will), then Republicans would act and refuse to participate in any of their so-called “debates”.

This would have given repeated opportunities to highlight the fundamental lack of fairness and apparent bias of NBC and CNN to the middle-of-the-roaders the movies are obviously intended to sway. It would have given repeated opportunities to air the laundry list of failures and corruption which will certainly be omitted that need to be attached to Hillary’s skirt. It would have justified the resulting boycott based on what CNN and NBC actually did as opposed to what we are pretty sure they will do, at a point far closer in time to the actual debates.

It is surprising that Mika and Joe actually are willing to recognize there is an issue of bias and fairness raised by these movies. And, apparently, Brock has a better grasp of the potential downsides than Priebus. Or is it that Priebus has a much smaller agenda?

I’m not giving Priebus credit for finally standing up to these openly partisan pretend journalists. He is simply trying to protect establishment candidates by limiting the opportunities for Tea Party upstarts to improve their position by focusing attention on their names and arguments in broadcast debates.

Where the rat-eared coward spent months ramming Obamacare through, Hillary would have cut a lesser deal (understanding incrementalism) and gone on to another agenda item.

Happy Nomad on August 7, 2013 at 11:58 AM

That’s the thing I find most dangerous about Hillary regarding the liberal agenda: She’s motive, always in action when given the chance. Obama, on the other hand, stays stuck. He gets something he wants, using other people, then doesn’t know where to go next. He is always floundering, seeking something but he doesn’t know what. Well, except to have his ravenous ego constantly fed.

I sometimes think Obama is a liberal because he’s trained that way, like Pavlov’s dogs. Hillary, on the other hand, is a True Believer. Obama advances the liberal agenda by rote, where Hillary wants it because she’d dedicated to it — the same way you and I won’t any time soon let go of our guns.

I’m still running on my gut here. It’s just the way it all looks to me. And I don’t like any of it!

You make a good case. But the thing about Hillary is that, in some ways, she’s more devisive than the rat-eared coward. And every now and then the mask slips and we see the snarling “At this point, what difference does it make” Hillary.

I think the biggest difference would be in the approach. Hillary is better at picking her battles. Where the rat-eared coward spent months ramming Obamacare through, Hillary would have cut a lesser deal (understanding incrementalism) and gone on to another agenda item. Keep in mind Obama promised both the gays and the illegals that he would get around to rewarding them before the 2010 elections but Obamacare took so long and so much political capital that “their issues” were sidelined and abandoned when the GOP took the House. Not that those kind of people ever vote for Republicans anyway.

]]>By: JRhttp://hotair.com/archives/2013/08/07/mika-brzezinski-david-brock-agree-that-priebus-has-a-point-about-hillary-films/comment-page-1/#comment-7228003
Wed, 07 Aug 2013 15:54:15 +0000http://hotair.com/?p=273680#comment-7228003Scarborough is looking more and more like Waldo everyday
]]>By: EastofEdenhttp://hotair.com/archives/2013/08/07/mika-brzezinski-david-brock-agree-that-priebus-has-a-point-about-hillary-films/comment-page-1/#comment-7227999
Wed, 07 Aug 2013 15:53:08 +0000http://hotair.com/?p=273680#comment-7227999Priebus’s position on this makes it that much harder to address the real issue — Republicans have been absolutely steamrolled on moderators in primaries, but especially in the presidential debates.

I don’t think Crowley should ever be allowed to moderate a debate again, primary or presidential, under any conditions, HRC movies or not.

Instead of this nonsense by Priebus, he ought to be saying:

Whoever the Republican nominee is, there must be a better way of picking moderators. Romney got sucker-punched by Crowley, and I’m here to help whoever our nominee is avoid that. And we also want to avoid this nonsense of a former Clinton hack teeing off the war on women campaign by asking about birth control in the primaries. So as far as the RNC is able, we will work with whomever to insure that the moderators aren’t people whose intent it is to further the Democratic nominee.

You can’t win this fight if you don’t name the real problem. And Priebus has yet to name the real problem.

Stop “negotiating”…. Tell the MSM they are more than welcome to run whatever they want on their airwaves – it’s their business decision. They just forfeit their access to your candidates across the board. They’re never going to play nice with your candidates anyway – stop playing.

2nd Ammendment Mother on August 7, 2013 at 11:43 AM

Far as I’m concerned, liberal media pundits have no business sticking their noses into Conservative matters. Many Conservatives used to be liberal, but no liberal has ever been Conservative. They see us according to their most base definitions, according to the their narrow vision of the Universe; they refuse to acknowledge and see us as we are according to our beliefs. Liberals don’t even share our values.

So, you’re totally right. I see no need to ‘negotiate’ with liberals. There is no common ground, so there’s no point to even try.

]]>By: JRhttp://hotair.com/archives/2013/08/07/mika-brzezinski-david-brock-agree-that-priebus-has-a-point-about-hillary-films/comment-page-1/#comment-7227981
Wed, 07 Aug 2013 15:48:08 +0000http://hotair.com/?p=273680#comment-7227981is this the same lady who plays on “House of Cards”?
]]>By: 2nd Ammendment Motherhttp://hotair.com/archives/2013/08/07/mika-brzezinski-david-brock-agree-that-priebus-has-a-point-about-hillary-films/comment-page-1/#comment-7227963
Wed, 07 Aug 2013 15:43:38 +0000http://hotair.com/?p=273680#comment-7227963Stop “negotiating”…. Tell the MSM they are more than welcome to run whatever they want on their airwaves – it’s their business decision. They just forfeit their access to your candidates across the board. They’re never going to play nice with your candidates anyway – stop playing.
]]>By: Iblishttp://hotair.com/archives/2013/08/07/mika-brzezinski-david-brock-agree-that-priebus-has-a-point-about-hillary-films/comment-page-1/#comment-7227961
Wed, 07 Aug 2013 15:43:27 +0000http://hotair.com/?p=273680#comment-7227961Now if only Preibus had the guts to fight for the Presidential debates too.
]]>By: Liamhttp://hotair.com/archives/2013/08/07/mika-brzezinski-david-brock-agree-that-priebus-has-a-point-about-hillary-films/comment-page-1/#comment-7227938
Wed, 07 Aug 2013 15:35:02 +0000http://hotair.com/?p=273680#comment-7227938

I’m not sure how you conclude that she would have advanced the liberal agenda further than the current rat-eared officeholder.

Happy Nomad on August 7, 2013 at 11:18 AM

I think she’d have been able to build on past hype, with all the usual doting and fawning by the media.

Hillary is no leader, that’s for damned sure. Obama is strictly in-your-face, a common street thug. Hillary is like that, too, except she knows when to act coy and be subtle. Hillary is a political animal, where Obama is down in the dirt without getting his hands dirty.

That’s why I think, in some ways, Hillary would have been the better choice to advance the liberal agenda. Not that I want that, of course. Plus, she would have Bill behind her. His popularity and savvy would come into play. Hillary would need him, and Bill’s damned good at what he does.

In many ways, I count America lucky Hillary lost out for sake of liberals’ need for appearance of ‘tolerance’.

Maybe I’m not explaining this right? It’s more a gut feeling I’m trying to convey than an analysis.

]]>By: Dexter_Alariushttp://hotair.com/archives/2013/08/07/mika-brzezinski-david-brock-agree-that-priebus-has-a-point-about-hillary-films/comment-page-1/#comment-7227937
Wed, 07 Aug 2013 15:34:48 +0000http://hotair.com/?p=273680#comment-7227937Don’t make a threat you aren’t willing to go through with.
If they don’t cancel the projects, scratch them off the list for primary coverage.
]]>By: NJ Redhttp://hotair.com/archives/2013/08/07/mika-brzezinski-david-brock-agree-that-priebus-has-a-point-about-hillary-films/comment-page-1/#comment-7227931
Wed, 07 Aug 2013 15:33:06 +0000http://hotair.com/?p=273680#comment-7227931This crap is starting to really get on my nerves…I mean seriously, we just re-elected Captain Chuckles in November and ALREADY we are discussing this crap? I just can’t take 24/7 – 365 campaigns anymore. I still haven’t gotten rid of the headache ed from last election.

Can I get at least a year’s break from this crap? Guess not. All campaign, all the time. BLECCHHH

When MSNBC aired a Republican debate in 2011 they got their highest ratings in three years. That’s why Priebus has at least a little leverage with threatening to take Republican debates away from NBC and CNN. Those debates would get acceptable ratings.

J.S.K. on August 7, 2013 at 11:10 AM

I also think it is laying down a marker for 2016 when the discussion turns to debates for the general election. NBC and CNN have been put on notice to not even think about suggesting moderators who collaborate with the Demonrats.

Personally, I agree with the sentiment that the GOP should forego any general election debate in its current format.

I think Hillary would have advanced the liberal agenda a lot farther, and made it more popular than what Obama has done.

Liam on August 7, 2013 at 11:00 AM

Liam,

I’ve got to disagree with you on this. Aside from her own press releases there is nothing in Hillary Clinton’s background to suggest she would be a good leader. They literally had to seat her next to Joe Lieberman at her first SOTU as Senator so as she wouldn’t make a fool of herself. She spent her time in the Senate ramping up for running for President. She spent her time at State on feel-good junkets because the real foreign policy decisions were made by Jarrett and other un-elected un-confirmed members of the Chicago mafia.

Hillary Clinton has no leadership skills, no ability to unify, and no real agenda. She has accomplished nothing in high national office. I’m not sure how you conclude that she would have advanced the liberal agenda further than the current rat-eared officeholder.